We’ve
heard a lot about Geert Wilders, the Dutch parliamentarian whose warnings
about Muslim influence in his nation place him in the crosshairs of
the powers-that-be. But while the tow-headed modern-day Templar has
thus far dodged the hangman on Truth-speech charges, another intrepid
defender of Western civilization has not been so lucky. And we haven’t
heard much about him.

He
is French journalist Eric Zemmour, and he was just convicted this week
of “inciting racism.” Writes The New American’sR.
Cort Kirkwood:

Zemmour's "controversial"
remarks included his observation that most drug dealers in France
were black or Arab, and that employers "have the right"
to deny employment to those two groups of people.

Zemmour's criminal
speech occurred on a popular talk show during a discussion of why
French police seem to stop minorities more than whites. Said
Zemmour: "But why are they stopped 17 times? Why? Because
most dealers are blacks and Arabs. That's a fact."

So Zemmour wound
up in the French dock, and must
now pay $14,000 to five groups that sued him for racism.

According to
the New York Times, the
French court said Zemmour had "gone beyond the permitted
bounds of the right to freedom of speech," and that "...
Zemmour had a particular responsibility to respect those limits as
a 'professional of the media and of expression.'"

If
Zemmour doesn’t behave like a “professional of the media,”
it is only insofar as he is a patriot and French traditionalist. While
he is the son of Jewish Berbers who immigrated to France from Algeria
in the 1950s, he states unabashedly that he believes “France is
civilization with a capital ‘C.’” Moreover, he not
only supports the prohibition against wearing the full Islamic facial
veil in public, he “advocates a return to authorizing only Christian
first names for children born in France, a restriction lifted in 1993,”
reportsThe New York Times. He also states that late French President
Charles de Gaulle was correct when he said that mixing Muslims and Christians
is like “blending oil and vinegar.”

Unfortunately,
what also blends no better than oil and vinegar are secular Western
governments and reality. After all, as the book How to Win Friends
and Influence People may tell us, you may incite others any
time you render opinion. As for the opinion known as commentary,
it is mostly and necessarily social criticism, and all criticism could
conceivably inspire someone to dislike, demean or even commit violence
against its target. But do we say that Christopher Hitchens, Richard
Dawkins and their millions of “anti-theist” acolytes should
be punished for criticizing Christianity? And with all the violence
of the 2010 campaign cycle, should we prohibit criticism of Republicans,
Democrats and the Tea Party? I mean, we can go way beyond McCain-Feingold
and just ban campaign commercials altogether; after all, if they don’t
incite people, I don’t know what does. And would we have had the
fire-bombing of fur stores, the torching of SUVs and the actions of
the Unabomber had we not been accosted by environmentalist and animal-rights
propaganda?

The
truth is that all criticism evokes harsh feelings in some, yet no one
advocates banning all criticism. Instead, governments may use “offensiveness”
as a guide. This is completely subjective, however, as most everything
offends someone and most everyone is offended by something. But we can’t
ban everything, so the thought police use their own particular emotion-derived
values set as a guide. It’s called political correctness, which
is the suppression of Truth for the purposes of advancing lies. This
is why I label so-called hate-speech legislation “Truth-speech
laws.”

This
brings us to the main point. Liberal icon Daniel Patrick Moynihan once
said, “You’re entitled to your own opinions, but you’re
not entitled to your own facts.” But today’s liberals have
turned this on its head. Under their regime, we are entitled to neither
our own opinions nor any facts.

That
is, if they’re politically incorrect.

This
is why thought police in places such as Canada have said that the Truth
is no defense against “hate speech” charges. Imagine that…the
Truth will set you free – but not from the clutches of the Sultans
of Sensitivity.

Subscribe
to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter
Your E-Mail Address:

But
the worst kind of insensitivity is numbness to Truth. The Truth is always
a defense, as it originates with a source that transcends courts and
human-rights tribunals. And this should make a person wonder, if an
entity suppresses it, whose bidding is it really doing?

Ah,
the irony. A government suppresses Truth on behalf of a group that sometimes
may call that government as satanic. Well, I suppose everyone is right
about something.

Selwyn Duke is a writer, columnist and public
speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on
both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush
Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael
Savage Show. His work has appeared in Pat Buchanan's magazine, The American
Conservative, and he writes regularly for The New American, and Christian
Music Perspective.